Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Federal Communications Commission scraps limit on broadcast TV ownership

nbcnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 119 posts

Re: Federal Communications Commission scraps limit on broadcast TV ownership

#81

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

programmertote wrote: post #80
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #55

Brendan Carr will need to go to prison too, I suppose. There’s nothing in the universe of an argument for why he should be allowed to overturn the will of Congress here, he’s just a petty criminal who doesn’t think he has to follow the rules. 2029 is gonna be a tough year.

He will be pardoned by trump before the latter leaves the office. There will be LOTS of people pardoned by trump. I immigrated from a very poor, military-ruled country to the US more than 20 years ago. It is very sad to see the democratic system and the rule of law eroding in the US. All the mistakes that I observed and lived through in my former country are being practiced in the US these days.

Rand Paul has solved that problem for us today; if Fauci can be prosecuted despite his pardon, so can the Trumpists. (Probably a win-win for him, I suppose, and I was never a fan of the pardon power in the first place.)

Re: Federal Communications Commission scraps limit on broadcast TV ownership

#82

Post by actionfromafar »

freediddy wrote: post #69
s0ss wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

most people aren't hn readers. broadcast tv is far from useless in 2026, that's how many normies watch tv.

TV viewership for 18-49 has dropped almost 80% since 2000, with the bulk of that drop between 2015 and today. So most "normies" are not watching tv. Older people might, but they represent a fraction of the spending audience.

They just need to vote one last time. You, to save America from democracy.

Re: Federal Communications Commission scraps limit on broadcast TV ownership

#83

Post by Spooky23 »

ilovetux wrote: post #34

Didn't the supreme court recently overturn the Chevron Doctrine? Doesn't that mean agencies like this are not free to set their own rules when a law is ambiguous? And isnt the cap on number of households reached actually codified unambiguously in federal law? Seems to me like this should not be allowed to happen. Let me know if I am wrong.

Don’t worry, the deeply principled conservative justices will never allow some random bureaucrats to legislate.

Re: Federal Communications Commission scraps limit on broadcast TV ownership

#84

Post by toast0 »

trollbridge wrote: post #7

Broadcast TV seems laughably irrelevant. It’s difficult to find official numbers, but under 1% of US households have no cable, satellite TV, home Internet, or a cell phone. The latter two are how people consume video and TV to a large degree today. In exchange, we have a great deal of spectrum tied up for terrestrial TV, much of which goes to running infomercials or else is surreptitiously leased for terrestrial data…

> Realistically - this spectrum should simply be reassigned for IP based services, with perhaps some set aside for non profit / educational uses, some for commercial, etc.

They did this in the US already, three times.

In 1983, channels 70 to 83 were taken for mobile phones. In 2008, rf channels 52-69 were reassigned, and 2016, rf 38-51 were reassigned. rf 37 is reserved for radio astronomy.

Re: Federal Communications Commission scraps limit on broadcast TV ownership

#85

Post by magarnicle »

lenerdenator wrote: post #2

[flagged]

If broadcast TV competition was just between stations, then maybe this is a bad thing. But no, they are now competing against Netflix et al.

From my side of the pond this looks like a very outdated law that they've gotten rid of, though I understand the US TV market is pretty complex.

Re: Federal Communications Commission scraps limit on broadcast TV ownership

#86

Post by toast0 »

thomasjb wrote: post #75
jyoung8607 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seventeen years ago, when we transitioned, the state of available and deployed equipment, codecs, and home receivers would not have permitted it. I mean sure, you could pack four streams into one 6MHz channel. They could even be "HD" insofar as the transmitted stream is 720p or 1080i. The result would have been MPEG-2 program streams of about 4.5Mbit each instead of about 18-19Mbit (assuming no other subchannels). Th…

A single 6MHz channel at the top end of UHF band would be enough to implement a universal cellular telephony service - simple calls and texts - at very low cost if phones had modems for it. I think that would be the better use of spectrum.

RF Channels 38-83 have all been taken from (US) TV since the 80s. Mostly used for mobile phones.

rf 70+ is 800 Mhz

rf 52+ is 700 Mhz

rf 38+ is 600 Mhz

Lots of phones support these frequencies.

Kind of annoying for tv, because cell towers on frequencies that used to be tv frequencies can overload amplifiers, so peeps need to go put filters up before the preamp.

Re: Federal Communications Commission scraps limit on broadcast TV ownership

#87

Post by otterley »

SoftTalker wrote: post #76
francisofascii wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Irrelevant? I was under the impression cord cutting is pretty common. If you want to watch live sports or the news, you need CBS, NBC, ABC, FOX. We use a MoHu antenna in the attic.

I get all of those via streaming, local affiliates even, on Fubo. Hulu was similar IIRC. Have not had cable TV in years, even longer since I used an antenna.

You're paying for Fubo, though, are you not? It's not a free service like OTA TV is.

Re: Federal Communications Commission scraps limit on broadcast TV ownership

#88

Post by toast0 »

wmf wrote: post #28
jyoung8607 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's already widely done in the US. If you plug in an antenna and scan for local channels, what used to be one analog TV channel on colloquially-named "channel 7" in the defined channel 7 frequency range will now be seen as "channel 7-1" which is often (but not always!) actually broadcast on the old frequency. During the ATSC transition, it was important to retain the branding and consumer memory of "channel 7" eve…

That's not what I'm talking about though. We should have repacked ABC, NBC, CBS, and Fox onto a single channel.

If you're gonna smash everything onto a single channel, you may as well turn the whole thing off.

Gonna look like absolute trash. Might be almost acceptable with atsc 3, except for the diaster of DRM and new proprietary audio codecs that brings.

Re: Federal Communications Commission scraps limit on broadcast TV ownership

#89

Post by mulmen »

freediddy wrote: post #70
mulmen wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you believe everyone is just like you? What are the consequences of consolidating ownership of broadcast stations? Remember the Kimmel incident? How does that go with even more consolidation?

Yes most are just like me, because TV viewership has dropped almost 80% since 2000 for 18-49.

How are you still not getting this? The change is not about owning radio towers. It allows ownership of the programming, including local news production. This is a move for centralization of editorial control.

You might not care but Sinclair very much does.

Re: Federal Communications Commission scraps limit on broadcast TV ownership

#90

Post by SoftTalker »

otterley wrote: post #87
SoftTalker wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get all of those via streaming, local affiliates even, on Fubo. Hulu was similar IIRC. Have not had cable TV in years, even longer since I used an antenna.

You're paying for Fubo, though, are you not? It's not a free service like OTA TV is.

Correct.
Post reply on HN